bridge too far

But he is funny, weirdly.

mlt? Hmmm - caps not working

Have his services been dispensed with this season? Dreadful reporter - I could have done better and at least I would have been understood!

From the top of the home page: "Please note that, at busy periods, you may have to be a Registered or Full Member in order to view the main forum"

Maybe posting and viewing could be limited to full members only on match days?

It's 5 minutes between posting a comment and that comment appearing on here! That's dreadful! The BBC website is quicker!

Nope - mine too

My brother is on his second one. He raves about them!

I posted 'that link' (of a couple of weeks ago) to a well-respected sports journalist. He was aware of 'that information' (from a court in Florida) but told me that the press were gagged at the moment.

I would have thought cognitive ability to be more important, quite frankly. What's the point of learning by rote if you don't understand the 'why' behind what you've learned? Having said that, I still rely on the tables I learned as a 5 year old!

You might find this quite useful http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-14574816 Mr TF and I are on different networks (I'm on 02 and he's on Orange) - that way we reckon we increase our chances of good coverage if we're out and about together.

I don't think I've ever had a car for more than 3 years. But now that I've retired I guess I'll keep my current one until it dies.

Perhaps it's now time to stop calling them Rebels?

Just ignore him - don't rise to the bait. That will annoy him far more than any attempt at rational argument.

A couple of very good articles in today's Guardian: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/aug/23/andy-coulson-payments-tories http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/aug/23/andy-coulson-payments-news-international If you have the time, it's worth reading them in full.

I wonder why NI paid Coulson in instalments? Did they have a cash-flow problem? And he would have had to pay tax on his 'entitlement' - why didn't the clever clogs at Conservative Central Office not pick up on his tax code?

But I have - twice. Not an NDA in the sense of having to keep schtum but certainly in the sense of not being able to talk to previous clients or 'take them with me' for 12 months. As to your other point about being economical with the truth - why, then, didn't he answer Tom Watson's question by saying 'I'm not at liberty to discuss any, if there are any, financial settlements I may or may not have received from my former employer'? He just said 'no'. Sorry PEDG - just realised I've repeated your point.

Here's the exchange between Tom Watson (Labour MP) and Coulson at the Culture Select Committee in July 2009 Tom Watson And then you went to work directly for the Conservative party. Coulson That is right. Tom Watson And you have not got any secondary income other than that have you? Coulson No. Watson So your sole income was News International and then your sole income was the Conservative party? Coulson Yes. Tom Watson: That is great, thank you.

With all due respect, Trousers, there's a bit of a difference between any screening you may have undergone for your job and the screening that should have been done for his. Especially given the incestuous relationship between NI and Cameron (i.e. Murdoch's stated intention to support Cameron in the election).

It's NOT JUST about lack of judgement on Cameron's part. It IS ALSO about the fact that a) the powers that be didn't do an in-depth screening of Coulson that they should have done. He was party to hugely sensitive information whilst working at No. 10 and, in the past, spin doctors in such a position had the highest level of screening. Such screening would, for example, have examined his personal finances and would have shown that he was in receipt of payments from his former employer. b) someone, somewhere either lied to the Conservative party OR did, in fact, give the party this information and it chose to ignore it. c) Coulson lied to the Select Committee (see the end part of the Guardian article linked above) d) News International lied too when it said that Coulson wasn't in receipt of payment from them. His negotiations about his severance package aren't relevant. The subsequent lying / economy with the truth (allegedly) very much is.

I agree BUT......... There are two important and different points. 1. The Conservative party either was lied to by Coulson or did, in fact, know of this arrangement but is denying it. 2. Coulson lied to the Select Committee. There is also a question as to whether his payments whilst being employed by No.10 amounted to a donation to the Conservative party that had not been declared. Donations can be in 'kind' as well as in cash. I can understand the salary in lieu and the pension arrangements but I struggle to see how continued health insurance and a company car paid for by News International can be construed as payment in lieu. When I was paid 3 months' salary in lieu, I still had to give up my company car and I think this is normal practice.

The bit at the bottom of this Guardian article is shocking! It implies that Coulson lied to MPs. http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/aug/23/andy-coulson-news-international-tories

The most worrying aspect, Trousers, is that the Conservative bigwigs 'apparently' were unaware of this arrangement. Oh and BTW, I fly to the moon this afternoon

Uh oh! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-14624167

Now that Tudor House has reopened, we're looking forward to a trip down to my beloved Southampton. Is the Bargate still open, does anyone know? We'll probably do a nostalgia drive around Sholing (where I used to live) and Hill Lane (where I went to school). And, no doubt, we'll have a look at West Quay. Anywhere else we should consider?